Dr. Morganasked the Attorney-General whether, in view of the risks, inherent in the modem treatment of syphilis by drugs containing arsenic, he has considered the probability of action for damages or legal suits against the special practitioners in connection with their work under the compulsory treatment powers of Regulation 33B and the position if a breadwinner dies or can prove permanent disability as the result of enforced treatment; and whether legal help will be afforded to such individuals in prosecuting claims in forma pauperis?
§ Mr. E. BrownI have been asked to reply. The construction of the regulation to which my hon. Friend refers is a matter for the courts and not for me to determine, but I do not think that a patient who is treated under the regulation is in a different position as regards claims against the practitioner than a patient who is treated by a practitioner who has been consulted in the usual way. As regards the second part of the Question, the rules as to proceedings by poor persons will apply to a person who desires to bring an action in the High Court in the circumstances assumed as they apply in the case of other actions in the High Court.